This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

I'm afraid we've crossed another barrier into lawlessness. The highest court in the land has now told us that the plain meaning of words in a law are less important than what the court thinks the words should mean.

re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

Originally Posted by Logicman

<facepalm>

Well, enjoy your sky-high premiums and $5K and $10K deductibles, LOL!

Y'know, when it comes to life-saving surgery, I'd much rather owe a $10K deductible (even though the max is actually about $6,500) than to forego the surgery at all because (if we went back to the way it was pre-ACA) I can't have it because I'm not rich enough to pay for it out of pocket and my pre-existing conditions prevent me from getting insurance anyway....

And if you lived in a state that accepted the federal funding, maybe you wouldn't be paying sky-high premiums. I know here in Washington state, my brothers-in-laws' premium payments are zero, and their deductibles (for major stuff not otherwise covered) is $6500.

But I guess that's tyranny...and telling people that they can't have insurance because they have pre-existing conditions, or that they have to pay more because they're women, well, THAT's REAL FREEDOM!

“To do evil, a human being must first of all believe that what he’s doing is good" - Solzhenitsyn

"...with the terrorists, you have to take out their families." - Donald Trump

re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

Originally Posted by CanadaJohn

That's fair - I'd say if Hillary Clinton somehow becomes President, a huge mistake in my view, you can forget about any comprehensive change to the ACA. It will be left to collapse unto itself. The only chance for comprehensive reform will be through a Republican President, someone like Jeb Bush, who can move away from the mandates and push to have broadened coverage of those without insurance at the moment - this is what should have been done in the US before the ACA. It would be, in effect, a federally funded complete expansion of Medicaid to cover those without insurance for financial reasons. In effect, a self-insurance program.

That will, over time, move the nation towards a single payer system that is supported by the majority of people. And you're right, it wouldn't be quick and it won't be easy, but a Clinton Presidency sets it back a decade and perhaps the ACA collapses under it's own inefficient weight.

You bring up interesting points, though I'm not sure I (always) see the same results you envision.

Why is it you believe Mrs. Clinton would let the ACA collapse upon itself?

(she was a strong healthcare proponent during her husband's presidency, but got beaten back by the insurance industry then, from my best recollection)

I do find it interesting you feel a Republican could save it, but with someone like Mr. Bush you might be right, seeing that he seems extremely moderate to me. But I'm still not sure I see the GOP as a whole getting behind the ACA or universal healthcare at this time.

And you are right in that there is the possibility of MedicAid expansion (though I originally felt there could be a MediCare expansion, possibly starting with a buy-in, whether subsidized or not). But yes, the MedicAid threshold was increased 125% under the ACA, and it could be progressively bumped-up over time.

I wouldn't doubt that under the umbrella-guise of the ACA, several of these tacts merge and morph over the years into something approaching universal coverage.

But I'm dead against a means-tested 'government picks winners & losers system', like the current ACA and MedicAid. If there's a benefit to be provided, it should be provided for all, equally.

[BTW CanadaJohn, my grandfather migrated from Poland to Canada firstly, living there for quite a few years while bringing in tons of family members, before eventually ending-up in the States. Consequently, I've got relatives from Quebec to Vancouver and we visit each-other occasionally, so I've had some very basic familiarity with the Canuck health system since the early '70's - that's why, in part, I want us to enjoy universal healthcare here.]

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

re: Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Subsidies[W:700]

Originally Posted by ludin

unfortunately there is no more appeals. the SCOTUS again screwed the American people over.
we will have to wait till 2016 and hopefully a republican president use budget reconciliation to remove obamacare and put something else in it's place.

Heya Ludin. Here is what Boehner said today.

Boehner: We'll keep trying to repeal Obamacare......

House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday that the GOP will keep trying to repeal Obamacare, after a Supreme Court ruling that upheld subsidies to people using the federal insurance exchange and basically left the law intact.

Obamacare is fundamentally broken, increasing healthcare costs for millions of Americans. Today's ruling doesn't change that fact," Boehner said. "Republicans will continue to listen to American families and work to protect them from the consequences of Obamacare." "And we will continue our efforts to repeal the law and replace it with patient-centered solutions that meet the needs of seniors, small business owners, and middle-class families," he said.

Republicans have been legislatively picking at the law, voting to repeal parts of it, most recently the medical device tax. The GOP is also mulling a plan to repeal much of the law as part of the budget process, using a parliamentary procedure that would allow the Senate GOP to vote to repeal it with just 51 votes.....snip~